Author Topic: Writing an article on top 10 fastest bikes avaliable. (Read 98646 times) Tweet

oilheadron · « **Reply #75 on:** January 04, 2005, 10:15:04 PM »

Yeah, they're close. No mystery there. But the Busa has an undeniable edge. I'd guess close to 5 mph if you averaged up all the head-to-heads. Think I'll do that out of curiosity now.

Twisted · « **Reply #76 on:** January 04, 2005, 10:29:16 PM »

Quote from: BCRBusa

Quote from: Twisted
Quote from: BCRBusa
Top speed....stock
1999-2000 Suzuki Hayabusa 194mph
2000-2001 Kawasaki ZX12 189mph
2004-ZX10 186MPH
2004-Yamaha R1 184mph
2004-Suzuki GSXR1000 180mph
1997-2004 Honda CBR1100XX 178mph
1992-1999 Kawasaki ZX11 176mph
1989-1991 Kawasaki ZX10 170mph
2004-GSXR 750 168mph
1994-1997 GSXR1100 167mph

This is off the top of my head...figures should be close.
Y2K is not a readily available bike especially for those of us that don't have $150,000 to spend.
Tell ya what let us spend $30,000 on a Hayabusa, and it'll spank a Y2K into the next State....or any other bike for that matter with it's 500+++ horsepower

wud about the new triumph busa killer? posed to do about 180?

do you mean "mass" produced, or limited?

LOL....forgot about that one

um, I actually meant the beamer yo, the 1200 busa beater, it will kick jamies 12 to the curb as well...

Hank · « **Reply #77 on:** January 05, 2005, 11:32:04 AM »

Quote from: joea

its just funny to me...........most head to head tests have
them within 2 mph of each other, and in fact a zx12 faster than
the busa in at least one head to head...........its pretty much a tossup...

Hank when you ran your stock busa's and zx12 what did you find
in "real world"...........??????? (and how does your new zx10 fair
on the top end to your stock busa numbers??)

Well Joe--to tell you the truth,the spoon you just gave me is too big to use

.Here it is---your results may vary---STOCK BIKES---EQUAL RIDERS---1/4 mile---pick-em.STOCK ZX-10 at this altitude is FASTER than a STOCK Busa.Stock Busa or 12 here is 178-183 with rider of my size and weight.10 will hit the limiter plus a few.190 is my guess.Bring your STOCK bike for demo.Twisted has yet to post a gps showing it at 187,and if it is stock,he won't.3400 ft make a difference?Talk amongst yourselfs.I have SEVERAL people who will agree,as they were on the other bikes.

oilheadron · « **Reply #78 on:** January 05, 2005, 12:56:48 PM »

FK, I'm curious. Scan some articles or give us a link to them. And indicate the model years of the bikes tested.

1. You and your sources are probably full of crap and totally wrong about those obscure few tests, like many times before (your record on the net is DISMAL)

2. IF THE TESTS EVEN EXIST show us that they are of unlimited production bikes, otherwise they're meaningless in this discussion

3. I've seen several different UK bike mags myself (Bike and Rider are two that I know of for certain, they're in front of me now) and every single one shows the '12 to be slower

Cough up or go away.

JorNic Motorsports · « **Reply #79 on:** January 05, 2005, 01:27:59 PM »

cool. rehashed idle gay benter with the limey bastard across the pond. this feels so like 2002 all over again

Busafied™ · « **Reply #80 on:** January 05, 2005, 01:34:04 PM »

FK are you cooking "Fumundacheese" again?

Steve A · « **Reply #81 on:** January 05, 2005, 01:43:14 PM »

A Haggis ?? ?? ??

02SE · « **Reply #82 on:** January 05, 2005, 01:43:59 PM »

I think I smell Haggis.

oilheadron · « **Reply #83 on:** January 05, 2005, 01:48:32 PM »

Just like I thought, no facts, just more BS.

So, I dug up a few old UK mags of my own (I'm off work today). Here's the first, Superbike Aug 2002 (Superbike being one of the mags above):

1. Direct quote: "The Suzuki's attitude, aggression, and sheer grunt put it above the best that the ZX-12 can deliver."

2. Top speeds with limited bikes (and the results will will give one a hint how lame this mag really is):

Busa, 1st attempt "163 mph", 2nd attempt "166 mph"

ZX-12R, 1st attempt "clutch", 2nd attempt "died"

I'm not kidding.

02SE · « **Reply #84 on:** January 05, 2005, 01:56:13 PM »

Quote from: Steve A

A Haggis ?? ?? ??

Dammit Steve, we posted at the same time.

joea · « **Reply #85 on:** January 05, 2005, 05:19:13 PM »

thanks Hank, I knew these lame fuckers would ignore
real world facts like that..................

buncha magazine mechanics...............

ah isnt winter grand????

Joe

oilheadron · « **Reply #86 on:** January 05, 2005, 05:25:35 PM »

This particular magazine mechanic has outrun a bunch of ZX-12s a bunch of times.

Edit: That's why I'm so adamant about the Busa's straightline superiority. The old '99 just simply fucking refuses to lose to '12s with equivalent mods and always has (almost without exception).

SPEED KING · « **Reply #87 on:** January 05, 2005, 05:44:57 PM »

Wow this went three pages...

Busa@11K · « **Reply #88 on:** January 05, 2005, 06:22:56 PM »

Quote from: Pat Dietrich

Quote from: 02SE
No completely stock bike has yet exceeded the 194 mph run recorded by a '99 Suzuki Hayabusa, which is listed in the Guinness Book of World Records.

Didn't one run 202 in europe in the hands of a magazine??

They had a big tail wind on that run if I recall correctly.

Busa@11K · « **Reply #89 on:** January 05, 2005, 06:42:43 PM »

Quote from: Fearsome

And remember the Busas gearing runs out at 195/196 ...

Not true ... stock gearing (17/40) is good for 201~202 mph at the limiter in 6th gear. Plus, if there is any tire circumference growth, that will increase the possible speed.

wheelieking · « **Reply #90 on:** January 05, 2005, 07:17:36 PM »

Quote from: oilheadron

FK, I'm curious. Scan some articles or give us a link to them. And indicate the model years of the bikes tested.

1. You and your sources are probably full of crap and totally wrong about those obscure few tests, like many times before (your record on the net is DISMAL)

2. IF THE TESTS EVEN EXIST show us that they are of unlimited production bikes, otherwise they're meaningless in this discussion

3. I've seen several different UK bike mags myself (Bike and Rider are two that I know of for certain, they're in front of me now) and every single one shows the '12 to be slower

Cough up or go away.

BCRBusa · « **Reply #91 on:** January 05, 2005, 07:21:58 PM »

Jeez....I guess the bunch of us, as well as the rest of the population of this planet who keep up with the bike world have deffinately been proven wrong, by...what's his name again...the dude from the UK...whatever it is....too lazy to look right now!!
I now have absolutely no idea why the fastest modified bikes in the world are Busas...I mean....surely there are 12's out there that would slap 256mph Busas in the face.
If they run faster stock... surely they'll run faster modified right, and if not...why??

Strange that whatever his name is, is just about the only person out there that thinks a stock 12 will beat a stock Busa..............man have I been misinformed.
Why did the guys on the 12 board not tell me the 12's were faster when I asked how they compared about a year and change back....I'm kinda pissed now.....here I am building another Busa, when I coulda built a 12 instead....damnit

wheelieking · « **Reply #92 on:** January 05, 2005, 07:44:47 PM »

stock... both bikes are very close... 12r did 192 here 195 over there 189 there.... ive seen the busa run 194 here 184, 189, etc. ... we all put pipes and pcs on our bikes.... with these small modifications the 12 has shown to come out on top due to its horsepower advantage... it shows a larger benefit to piping and pc ( increased air flow ) i know dynos are give and take but if you look the 12 always show better numbers... however the stock bikes they are close... busa system is less restrictive stock so it is closer to its production peak... it is not uncommon for 12s including mine to dyno at low 180s

another thing to consider is the 12 has much better wind protection

you almost have to be a midget to fit under the busas fairing

oh yea what happened in the mach 3 video you would think video would be enough.. busa took advantage with torque in initial roll on then ...zx12r drove by with its top end rush

here are a couple of articles

http://www.esportbike.com/news/reviews/aug00/raptor.html

http://www.sportrider.com/bikes/146_0110_hayabusa/

Twisted · « **Reply #93 on:** January 05, 2005, 07:47:02 PM »

Quote from: Hank

Quote from: joea
its just funny to me...........most head to head tests have
them within 2 mph of each other, and in fact a zx12 faster than
the busa in at least one head to head...........its pretty much a tossup...

Hank when you ran your stock busa's and zx12 what did you find
in "real world"...........??????? (and how does your new zx10 fair
on the top end to your stock busa numbers??)

Well Joe--to tell you the truth,the spoon you just gave me is too big to use .Here it is---your results may vary---STOCK BIKES---EQUAL RIDERS---1/4 mile---pick-em.STOCK ZX-10 at this altitude is FASTER than a STOCK Busa.Stock Busa or 12 here is 178-183 with rider of my size and weight.10 will hit the limiter plus a few.190 is my guess.Bring your STOCK bike for demo.Twisted has yet to post a gps showing it at 187,and if it is stock,he won't.3400 ft make a difference?Talk amongst yourselfs.I have SEVERAL people who will agree,as they were on the other bikes.

hey I got about 50 more break in miles and an oil change to go, chill already... in this cold I think the busa will take it to the limiter in sixth, its like fuggin boost mang! second gear the front comes up off 2K!!! right out of the hole? no bounce, no nuttin! messed up stuff...

wheelieking · « **Reply #94 on:** January 05, 2005, 07:51:23 PM »

i would like to add that once the bikes go beyond pipe and pc the busa has kicked arse.. mainly because of turboing.. it is much easier to turbo.... but those records basically come down to who has the most money and r and d.... i am sure that if someone felt like trying to perfect the air box (frame) on the 12 and spent the time it would be up there too. but who wants to spend 20k plus trying to seal the frame... it is easier to buy a busa and turbo it.

joea · « **Reply #95 on:** January 05, 2005, 07:52:25 PM »

you guys are fuuuunny.........

I guess you ingored Hanks post (the one with first hand
experience owning both at same time as well as zx10, he actually
isnt full of himself or his ego, owns more busas than 99.9% of anyone).......

the fastest street bike in the world (exit speed over 120ft, on pavement)
is a Mr. Turbo busa.......so I guess unless you have that brand of modification you arent the fastest ..........

its a tossup........

everyone staying warm??.........

Joe

Twisted · « **Reply #96 on:** January 05, 2005, 07:52:25 PM »

Quote from: pollorecords

Dear friends,

I am not a big motorcycle enthusiast, but I am writing this article on top grade machines that can reach outstanding speeds. The article will be about the top 10 bikes on the world and will be featured on a brazilian magazine.

What I am looking for is a ranking of top speeds these superbikes can reach w/o much modificiations. I mean, what are the "official" speeds on bikes people can actualy buy, not pro racing bikes (MotoGP, for instance) or prototypes.

Can anyone help me? My e-mail is pollorecords@gmail.com

Cheers and thanks in advance,
Leo

so pollorecords, you gonna use us in your article?

ThrottleBastard · « **Reply #97 on:** January 05, 2005, 08:02:34 PM »

Anyone have that blurb from past LAB, about FuckSomeCows fellating some other 12-fan while both looking at magazine pictures of the 12?

02SE · « **Reply #98 on:** January 05, 2005, 08:06:09 PM »

Like I said at the top of this thread.

No stock bike has yet exceeded the fastest officially recorded top speed of 194 mph, set by a '99 Busa, and for which it is in the Guinness book of world records for doing so.

There have been higher recorded speeds for stock Busas, based on GPS measurement, and even using timing equipment. But no bike has set an official record over 194 mph.

Even the Muzzy run at Maxton, with their claimed stock ZX-12 was only 192.???, that's close, but it is still slower.

In day to day comparisons between individual bikes, outcomes can be a toss up.

Variables such as the size of the rider, state of tune of each bike (maybe one needs a tune-up), properly lubed and adjusted chains, can all have an effect on the outcome of any comparison.

Does it matter if one bike is a couple of mph faster than another, in real life, no. But even If a bike is only faster by a few mph, it's still faster.

Until another bike exceeds 194 mph, officially, the Busa is the fastest production bike, period.

wheelieking · « **Reply #99 on:** January 05, 2005, 08:25:54 PM »

Quote from: 02SE

Like I said at the top of this thread.

No stock bike has yet exceeded the fastest officially recorded top speed of 194 mph, set by a '99 Busa, and for which it is in the Guinness book of world records for doing so.

There have been higher recorded speeds for stock Busas, based on GPS measurement, and even using timing equipment. But no bike has set an official record over 194 mph.

Even the Muzzy run at Maxton, with their claimed stock ZX-12 was only 192.???, that's close, but it is still slower.

In day to day comparisons between individual bikes, outcomes can be a toss up.

Variables such as the size of the rider, state of tune of each bike (maybe one needs a tune-up), properly lubed and adjusted chains, can all have an effect on the outcome of any comparison.

Does it matter if one bike is a couple of mph faster than another, in real life, no. But even If a bike is only faster by a few mph, it's still faster.

Until another bike exceeds 194 mph, officially, the Busa is the fastest production bike, period.

well put 02se

News:

Author Topic: Writing an article on top 10 fastest bikes avaliable. (Read 98646 times) Tweet